platform (Last updated 22-Jun-2008 18:01 )

I will serve one term only. During this term I will focus on two major national initiatives: 1) creating a nationwide solar power grid that can help us begin to wean ourselves off our dependence on fossil fuels; and 2) ensuring universal access to broadband Internet. My major focus, internationally, will be to help negotiate peace between Israel and Palestine. All of my service as president — other than that which requires secrecy to best serve the public interest — will be televised or streamed on the Internet in real time.

additional planks, promises, and perspectives (in alphabetical order)

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

APOLOGY TO IRAQIS - I will offer an apology on behalf of the United States of America to Iraqis who lost friends and family in the invasion of Iraq.

ADHERE TO THE GENEVA CONVENTION - I will shut down the Guantanamo and CIA prisons, and move all U.S. prisoners into the justice system.

CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM - One of the reasons we need universal broadband Internet access (see plank, below) is because it will, to a limited degree, level the playing field with regard to building campaigns. Universal access will not, however, be sufficient to overcome the stacked deck that is the current campaign finance system, which takes its form in large part due to two faulty court rulings: Buckley v. Valeo and Santa Clara v. Southern Pacific. To be blunt, the majority opinion in Buckley v Valeo is wrong — limiting money is not limiting speech, it is limiting money. It's that simple. Money is a thing that can be exchanged for other things and services. Speech is an inalienable right the First Amendment guarantees to all Americans in equal measure. The fact that a very small minority of people control the vast majority of money in the U.S. and world does give them the right to more speech. If 100 people sit down at the table to have a discussion, but only 1 has a bullhorn and uses it, it is not a discussion among equals.

Santa Clara v Southern Pacific (or at least how it has been interpreted) is wrong — corporations are not people and therefore they should not have the right to influence the political process as persons.  Because the members of the corporate boards, business owners, etc., already have a vote and can contribute to campaigns as individuals, business interests are already represented in that way.  Allowing businesses to establish and contribute to PACs gives their controllers more influence multiplied by the factor of how many boards they sit on, companies they own, etc. Corporations should be banned from using corporate funds for political purposes.

CONGRESSIONAL REPRESENTATION FOR WASHINGTON, DC - Under the principle of "no taxation without representation," I will support expanding Congress so that the residents of the Washington D.C. can elect their own representatives.

COPYRIGHT LAW - I will not sign any bill that further extends the length of copyright protection.

COUNCIL OF ELDERS - George McGovern has created a bipartisan Council of Elders. I will incorporate the Council of Elders into any policy debates in which they believe they can be of help. (http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/archives/2006/07/mcgovern_create.html)

COUNSEL OF FORMER PRESIDENTS - I will seek the counsel of former presidents.

DEPARTMENT OF PEACE - I will support the creation of the Department of Peace.

DRUG POLICY - The so-called "war on drugs" has been a complete failure from day one. (See www.drugwarfacts.org.) It has not stopped the flow of illegal drugs in the least — anybody who wants illegal drugs can find them. It has empowered and enriched violent criminals. It has turned Mexico into a battleground between rival drug cartels. It is turning Afghanistan back into a narco-state. And the list goes on. We're punishing the rest of the world for our own problems. The best solution would be to legalize some of the most common drugs so that we can regulate, tax, and control them. This would destroy the black market and the cartels who exist because of it. At the very least, we need to decriminalize possession and re-channel the more than $50 billion dollars annually spent on the "war" against our own people toward education and programs to help people quit.

EDUCATION - This is the one issue that I think we can actually throw money at and do a lot of good. Basically, what I would propose is that we create a funded mandate to raise all public school teacher salaries by $40,000 -- even starting teachers, so that no teacher has to live on less than $70,000 per year. This will create a huge demand for teaching jobs among well-qualified people who now can't afford to teach, and competition for teaching positions will give administrators the luxury of choice that will drive up the quality of education everywhere. This should only be done if we get rid of unfunded mandates and factory-style education programs like "No Child Left Behind" that turn our children into mindless clones. Merit-based pay may be done at the local level at local initiative, but a federal merit-based pay program is bound to create perverse incentives and disfavor teachers of special education in the same way that NCLB does. Once pay is at the reasonable level that I advocate above, tenure should probably be done away with. All this could be done for about 5% of the cost of a year's worth of the occupation of Iraq.

ENERGY SECURITY - I will support a law guaranteeing people and businesses the right to sell any electricity they may produce back into the grid. I believe this will go a long way to promoting conservation and reducing our dependence on fossil fuels. See also SOLAR POWER.

FCC - I will appoint a chairperson and commissioners who understand that the concept of serving public interest refers to that which helps maintain a healthy democracy. More specifically, I will appoint or maintain commissioners that will help address the problem of concentration of media ownership, lack of diversity, and dishonesty in campaign advertising.

FDA - I will appoint a Secretary of Health and Human Services who will ensure that the FDA adheres to the "precautionary principle" in it approval processes in cases where the public is not given the opportunity to opt in to the use of new drugs. In other words, the current approval process is acceptable in cases when people who are being treated with new drugs are advised by their doctor of the potential risks, but it is completely unacceptable for the FDA to approve a drug for injecting into cow, for example, which thereby may make it into the human food supply indirectly andwithout the knowledge of the people who consume it. This deception is currently practiced by the FDA. Updated 19 Jul 07.

FEDERAL SHIELD LAW - I would support a federal shield law.

FLAG BURNING AMENDMENT - I can't think of anything that would be more un-American than amending the Constitution to prohibit flag burning. As a symbol of the United States of America, the Flag is also a symbol of the Constitution. As a symbol of the Constitution, the Flag is a symbol of the First Amendment, which guarantees the right of free expressions. Thus, an amendment to ban flag burning would be equivalent to an amendment against free expression, which would make the Constitution internally inconsistent.

FREE TRADE - Free trade is great, as long as the countries we trade with abide by the same (or better) environmental and labor standards that we do. Free trade is only justified when it is fair. When it is not, comparative advantage no longer applies. This is not to say we should not trade with countries that don't adhere to substantially equivalent standards, but each trade agreement must be negotiated on a case-by-case basis. Either way, we must expect and accept that our democratically determined political values will enter into the decisions about what is fair or not, and be reflected in the nature of individual trade agreements.

FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT - I do not believe the U.S. government has the right to restrict the movement of its citizens, within or beyond the borders of our country. I will work to rescind any active policies that do so.

FREEDOM PLEDGE - I have signed the Freedom Pledge and send it to the American Freedom Agenda headquarters. Here's a copy.

GUNS - I believe the Second Amendment guarantees the right the bear arms, and I support that right within reasonable limits. I would never support controls that would ensure that only criminals could own guns. I would, however, support controls that would help prevent arms from getting into the hands of criminals. I would also strongly support legislation to require gun microstamping technology to be utilized so that shell casings used in crimes could be traced back to the firearm purchaser.

HEALTH CARE - Although markets are usually the most efficient way of allocating scarce goods and services, the U.S. health care market is almost criminally inefficent. Approximately 31% of our health care spending goes to administration, compared to about 16.7 in Canada. (See http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/abstract/349/8/768.) This fact belies the claim that business is always more efficient than government. Moreover, Americans pay far more per capita than any other nation, but is ranked 72nd of 191 nations for overall health (http://www.who.int/whr/2000/en/annex01_en.pdf). Consequently, the idea of instituting a national health care system has a lot of appeal. On the other hand, considering the poisonous garbage so many people regularly consume in this country, it seems risky to subsidize other people's ability to make unhealthy choices. Moreover, I am wary of the kind of social engineering policies that inevitably follow when people's behavior has an effect on the public budget. As with most policy choices, a national health system would be a double-edged sword. Thus, the answer to whether we should have a national health care system should be decided by a non-partisan public study that measures the long-term costs versus benefits of national health care. Based on the national health care systems of all of the other wealthy countries, it seems likely that the benefits would outweigh the costs, but we need to do a study that looks in to how national health care might work in the unique social and economic conditions of the United States. If it is determined that the benefits of a national health care system would outweigh the costs, I would support a national health system designed along lines recommended by the study. I would require professional--not political--management of the system and thorough oversite, and also that the issue be revisited by Congress at regular intervals to determine whether sufficient progress is being made. Finally, the system will need to be designed with an exit strategy, so that if national health system is not working after a reasonable period of time, the legislation will provide for a smooth transition to re-privatization. Updated 19 Jul 07.

HYPOTHETICALS - I believe it is dishonest for elected representatives to claim they have a policy of not answering hypotheticals based solely on the fact that they are hypothetical. Letting the public know "what I would do if ..." is one of the most important parts of being a public servant. I will answer all questions based on their merits.

ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION - coming soon

INSTITUTIONALIZED BIGOTRY IN THE MILITARY - My first act as Commander in Chief will be to order an end to institutionalized bigotry in the military.

IRAQ - Because the Bush Administration was re-elected in 2004, there can be no doubt that the American People own the Iraq invasion.  From that point, the invasion was no longer the act of a small group of immoral ideologues at the top level of the national government, it was a collective act.  The sovereign People of the United States spoke and told the world with their votes that We collectively consented to an immoral invasion of a country that was no threat to U.S. or even to regional security.  Despite the fact that more people voted against President Bush than for any candidate in history, more people also voted for President Bush than for any candidate in history.

Yet perhaps not surprisingly, the Bush supporters have also turned out to be far less than courageous.  With all due respect to the brave but misguided few who joined to invasion because they believed it was the right thing to do, their numbers are miniscule compared to the millions of able-bodied Bush voters and other supporters of offensive war of choice who have not felt a corresponding moral obligation to back up their votes with action.  Military enlistments have not only not risen since the invasion, they have fallen considerably, to the point that the armed forces have had to lower their standards in order to attempt to make recruitment quotas.

Considering these two contradictory facts, that is, that We collectively approved of invading a foreign country that was no substantial threat to anyone, despite the fact that too few of us are willing to actually participate in the occupation and counterinsurgency ourselves, it seems too me that there is only one reasonable course of action for the next president to follow.

As soon as possible after taking office, the new president must personally deliver a speech to the United Nations.  The speech should begin with an apology to all Iraqis who suffered as a result of the U.S.-led invasion of their country.  The President should accept responsibility on behalf of the People of the United States, but also make it clear that preventative war is anathema to civilization, and that, to show our good faith, the Rome Statute will immediately be submitted to Congress for approval (meaning we will become a member the International Criminal Court) and all bilateral immunity, or so-called “Article 98”, agreements will be repealed.  (Article 98 agreements are bilateral agreements between the U.S. and other nations – generally made under threat of economic sanction or promise of large financial packages from the U.S. – which provide that neither party would bring the other’s current or former government officials, military or other personnel before the jurisdiction of the ICC.)

Next, the President should request that the U.N. debate and vote over whether the U.S. should stay or withdraw from Iraq.  If the U.N. resolves that the U.S. should withdraw, the U.S. would immediately commence the withdrawal.  If the U.N. resolves that the U.S. should stay, the U.S. would stay, but only as part of a U.N. peacekeeping force composed of representative numbers of troops from those countries who voted for the U.S. to stay in Iraq.

While this will not solve the Iraq fiasco or absolve the U.S. of responsibility, it will bring the U.S. back into the wider community of nations, and at the same time require the community of nations to address the problem of Iraq in a direct and public manner.

A note on withdrawal versus occupation: The United States has the most powerful military in the world by far. The invasion of Iraq cost the life of less than 100 U.S. soldiers, but the costs of the occupation in lives and treasure are enormous. Clearly, invasion is our strength. Though the occupation has been a failure so far, it does not follow that states now have an incentive to become a "terrorist state." For any state to threaten the U.S. would be suicide. Thus, when people argue that we should stay in Iraq because, if we don't, we'll have to come back later, I say, fine. If we pull out, we will save $100 billion and a thousand soldiers' lives annually until we have to go back. But chances are we won't have to go back because Iraq's leaders will have an enormous incentive to make their country work that they currently don't have. See also TERRORISM. Updated 19 Jul 07.

ISRAEL/PALESTINE - As President, with the help of experienced diplomats like Dennis Ross, I will personally sit down with Israeli and Palestinian leaders in public (i.e., televised) negotiations until a two-state solution is reached. Updated 19 Jul 07.

JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS - I will nominate judges who understand that the "People" referred to in the Constitution are living human citizens of the United States, and not factions or organizations, nor are they theoretical or ideological entities. Updated 12 Jul 07.

LANGUAGE - My administration will not use deceptive language in order to promote policy.

LIFE - At this point in my life, I would not choose to end anybody else's life, at any stage of life, unless his or her life posed an imminent threat to my or somebody else's life. I would not abort a fetus, nor would I kill an adult except in self-defense. But to quote Justice Blackmun's clerks, "One's philosophy, one's experiences, one's exposure to the raw edges of human existence, one's religious training, one's attitudes toward life and family and their values, and the moral standards one establishes and seeks to observe, are all likely to influence and to color one's thinking and conclusions about abortion" (410 U.S. 113). The people I know who have had abortions did not do it lightly, but they have no regrets, they don't consider themselves to be murderers, and nor do I. Both are now loving mothers. Do loving mothers murder their own children? If somebody is willing to murder their own children, why would we want them to be mothers? Personally, I wish we lived in a world where pregnancy were always a happy thing. I wish nobody wanted abortions or had them, but I don't feel I have a right to tell anybody -- let alone strangers -- what they should do with their bodies. COMMENTS (See also, STEM CELL RESEARCH.)

MARRIAGE - I will not support any amendment that would corrupt the Constitution and insert the Federal Government into the personal affairs of its employers, the People of the United States of America. In fact, I think we should deregulate marriage entirely.

MEDIA REFORM - I will support bringing back the something like the Fairness Doctrine. I believe that the First Amendment places an "affirmative responsibility" on the media to air competing points of view. At the time of the drafting of the Constitution, the only real threat to freedom of expression was the government; in the age of broadcast, it is huge media companies that have the power to not so much forbid as to exclude free expression. We need an FCC that recognizes media's obligation to serve in the public interest.

MEDIATION - I will make use of professional mediators in any negotiations of which I am part, and I will advocate their use in Congress.

MISSILE DEFENSE - We should work on this technology, but it is not as high a priority as pursuing defense through other means, especially through preventing nuclear proliferation.

NATIONAL REFERENDA - I would support a constitutional amendment to provide for national referenda in certain, limited circumstances. Some issues are so important, controversial and/or consequential that they might be best addressed with direct input from the People. War, for example. While the Commander in Chief should not be constrained from acting rapidly when national security demands it, if we have time to pursue a U.N. resolution that grants permission to initiate hostilities, in most cases we should also have time to ask permission from the People who are going to have to pay for the war with their money, lives, and limbs. Furthermore, for something so important and consequential as war, the question should not be controversial, and should meet a high threshold, such as a two-thirds majority. Other chronically intractable issues may not require so high a threshold. (See STEM CELL RESEARCH.) For these kinds of issues, we should build in some stability, such as only allowing votes on a particular issue every six years.

NANOTECHNOLOGY - I will advocate a national program to increase funding and operationalize nanotechnology within 10 years.

NET NEUTRALITY - I support "net neutrality."

NO PARDON FOR BUSH ET AL - If George W. Bush or any of his officers are convicted of any crimes, there will be no pardon during my administration.

NORTHERN COMMAND - I will decommission the Northern Command.

NUCLEAR PROLIFERATION - Preventing nuclear proliferation is the highest national defense priority, and it will be my highest national defense priority as president.

OVERCLASSIFICATION - I will put an end to overclassification, and I will expedite the declassification of anything that has been overclassified. See also, Transparency.

PRIVATE PRISONS - I believe private prisons a very dangerous development. Nobody should have a vested interest in keeping full jails or increasing the size of the prison population. I will support legislation that outlaws this practice.

SAFE DRINKING WATER - I will campaign for a national program to ensure all tap water is safe, and we can stop buying bottled water at ridiculous prices, and filling landfills and public places with the empty bottles.

SCHOOL PRAYER - The right to pray on one's personal time while at school is guaranteed by the First Amendment, as long as it is not required, lead, or promoted by the schools. It is not a school function to promote religious ideology -- prayer is a personal choice.

SOLAR POWER - I will advocate the creation a national solar power subsidy to help wean us off carbon based fuels as rapidly as possible. This can be accomplished by providing a subsidy to purchase solar panels for personal and business use and allowing anybody in the country to sell any excess clean energy that they produce back into the grid in order to repay the federal government for the subsidy. In other words, the government will coordinate a program to both help clean the air of greenhouse gases and provide energy security by dispursing power production throughout the country (in the same way that the decentralization of the Internet provides security from attack), and also by providing cheap and plentiful clean energy from which the People can profit through both innovation and conservation. In this way the program will be self-sustaining.

STEM CELL RESEARCH - While we all respect the opinions of those who believe that life begins at conception, it seems pointless not to attempt to advance science with cells that would be discarded anyway. I think of it as a variation on the voluntarily donation by adults of their bodies to science, or donating their organs. Though stem cells are not able to consent to giving their bodies for the greater good (at least in a way that we adults can comprehend), I think we should assume that -- being innocent, and therefore untainted by uncharitable thoughts, they would have consented to helping us out. Imagine an embryonic stem cell who is about to be destroyed anyway saying, "No, I'd rather not help." (See also, LIFE)

TALKING VS. NEGOTIATING WITH ENEMIES - I will talk to anybody to whom it might benefit the U.S. to talk. Talking is the only way to solve disputes. Talking with enemies isn't negotiating; it's a means by which we can try to understand what motivates them, to learn whether or not their grievances are due to a misunderstanding, and to develop the most accurate picture of what it would take to make peace and, ideally, friendship.

TAX PLAN - Coming soon.

TERRORISM - Americans need to get terrorism in perspective, and American politicians who use the politics of fear to scare people into electing them are criminally responsible in failing to serve the public interest and help Americans see this problem in a reasonable way.  Americans are far more likely to die from getting struck by lightening, getting hit by a drunk driver, getting his by a driver talking on a cell phone, falling from a ladder, excessive heat, excessive cold, drowning, railway accident, homicide, and strangulation—to name just a few causes—than by terrorism.  Certainly, there is the potential for terrorist attacks to become more deadly, but the proper response to this is to beef up anti-nuclear proliferation efforts and tracking of other hazardous materials, as well as protecting vulnerable sites in the United States, and by increased law enforcement effrts.  The best intelligence comes from friends, which is why invading foreign countries—particularly Islamic countries that do not sponsor or provide a safe haven for terrorists—and killing tens of thousands of innocent civilians is exactly the wrong thing to do if we want to reduce terrorism. The right thing to do is step up police efforts and take the fight to terrorists in a way that allows them to be prosecuted in the courts, and shows them to the world to be the criminals that they are. Updated 19 Jul 07.

TOBACCO TREATY - I will forward the Tobacco Treaty to the Senate for ratification. (It has been sitting on President Bush's desk since 2005.)

TRANSPARENCY - My campaign will be as transparent as possible, and, if elected, I will televise my entire presidency (during working hours).

UNITARY PRESIDENT - I completely reject the idea of the so-called "unitary president." The Constitution was specifically written to guarantee we are not inflicted with this kind of tyrannical executive power. The Constitution of the United States The Federalist Papers

UNITED NATIONS - See my article on this subject at http://www.helium.com/tm/832973/united-nations-seems-flames

UNIVERSAL ACCESS TO BROADBAND INTERNET - I will advocate a national program to ensure universal Internet access within four years.

VACATION - I will take no more than one week of vacation per year.

VETO POLICY - Executive Branch analyses and discussions about bills will all be broadcast live to the public. My staff will broadcast themselves reading each bill in its entirety, and will be directed to bring any potentially relevant items to my attention. Before I veto or sign any bill, I will publicly discuss my reasons for doing so at length. As all legislative power is vested in the Congress of the United States, I will uphold all laws in the spirit in which Congress intended. I will not use signing statements as a means to avoid my duty to enforce the laws passed by the Legislative Branch.

VOTE - I will advocate making national elections national holidays.

WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION (WMDs) - I will require that this term be replaced in the official lexicon of the U.S. Government by more specific terms. "Weapons of mass destruction" is an intentionally vague term which encompasses not only nuclear, but also chemical and biological weapons, weapons that should not be considered to be in the same category as the massively destructive nuclear weapons, nor even as carpet bombing with conventional weapons. Neither are chemical and biological weapons even "destructive" in the common sense of the word since chemical and biological weapons cause no infrastructure damage and generally cause no long-term environmental damage. The term serves no practical or honest purpose, and has been used recently to justify the invasion of a country that was no threat to the United States.